









. -^o^ 









i ♦J 



















* O - ^ ^«,^ ^ 














'o • h 



n..o< 








' V^^\o^ V^^"s*^ "°**^-V ... X 



:^' v'v 









■.' ^^''-^ °. 










•« • o 

























ADDRESS 



HUGH N. SMITH. OF NEW MEXICO, 



TO THE PEOPLE OF THAT TERRITORY. 



To the People of jYew Mexico : 

As your delegate to the Congress of the United States, I regret to inform 
you that my mission has failed; your rights as citizens, under the Govern- 
ment of the Union, assured to you by the treaty of cession, have thus far 
been denied. As a people, constituting a large community, once a de- 
partment in the federative Republic of Mexico, you certainly are entitled 
to the right of modified representation, which has heretofore been accorded 
to the people in all other Territories of the United States, in which such an 
organization existed as could be recognised as a government. This right 
has always been conceded upon the principle that the inchoate govern- 
ments, charged with the interests of a people, who are, at some time, to 
come as a State into the Union, should have a representative on the floor 
of one branch of Congress, to make known the condition, to advocate the 
interests, and defend the rights of a community, which, in its infancy, is 
to receive from the National Legislature those fundamental and radical 
impressions which shape its future destiny. If the great American prin- 
ciple of the right of representation which has been extended to all the 
territorial governments of the United States, (even to those having the 
care of a few scattered people, as in the case of Florida, or where, as in 
the case of Minesota, there was no legalized government at all,) it ought 
surely now to be extended to you, my constituents, a people who come 
with a novel 2;overnment into the Union, which is to undero-o o-reat 
changes; who have a multitude of vast interests to be arbitrated in Con- 
gress, which once decided, are decided forever; and who, above all, have 
a right to be heard, at this moment, in the halls of the supreme civil au- 
thority, because you and your civil government are now at the mercy of 
a miUtary dictatorship, when your State is threatened with dismember- 
ment, and, what is yet more fatal, the introduction of slavery into its 
1 



t- 



bosom. But the very ground upon which you are justly entitled to repre- 
sentation is the reason for its denial. It is this double design against what- 
ever is most dear to you as a people, (against your right to the limits of a 
domain which you inherited, whilst Texas, that would sever it, was an 
unexplored wilderness, and against your right to exclude slavery from it, 
which was sealed by a constitutional sanction coming with you into this 
Union,) which has excluded your delegate from a seat whence he might 
repel the invasion. 

The most formidable part of this combination against you is that which 
originates in the slave interest. It not only rallies against you the whole 
slaveholding South, but all the influence of selfish, venal, and ambitious 
men in the North, looking to speculations in discredited bonds and land 
jobbing, or to the political honors which the combined vote of the South 
may promise. The cement of this strength in the South is not so much 
the interest in slave property, but the political power dependent on it. 
The great struggle is to secure for the decaying popular force of that sec- 
tion an equal weight in the Senate of the United States with the rapidly 
progressive population and multiplying free States of the Union. To this 
aim the rights and interests and all the hopes of a rapidly growing and 
rich prosperity, which beckoned New Mexico into the Union, are to be 
sacrificed. The doctrine of the slaveholding States, in regard to their 
domestic institutions, is non-intervention: but with regard to yours, it is 
instant intervention, to set at nought the prohibition of slavery which you 
brought with you into the Union, as one of your fundamental laws, and a 
fixed municipal policy — a policy which, now that you are under the shield 
of the great North American Republic, would invite into your country the 
intellect, industry, skill, enterprise, and capital, not only of the free States 
of the North, but a portion of that emigration from Europe which is now 
filling up the agricultural regions of the Mississippi, and the golden moun- 
tains, valleys, and commercial ports of Cahfornia, with a teeming popula- 
tion. Making the link between these two great countries, you could not fail 
to partake of their prosperity, if you could escape that blight which has 
doomed the fairest portion of our continent to a premature decline. Vir- 
ginia, the first and greatest of the States of the Union; richest in her great 
men, her soil, her minerals, her bays, her rivers, and her delightful cli- 
mate, has sunk into a third rate State, under the decay which affects the 
root of all growth in nations as in individuals — the decay of enlightened 
labor. Such has been the fate of Virginia, and yet her fate has been better 
than that of any of her Southern sisters. The vigor which the free muni- 
cipal institutions of England infused into the race that gave the first im- 
pulse to the Southern Commonwealths, has been gradually running out 



under an adverse system. The labor of negroes, in exempting the master 
from labor, has made every free man look to such exemption not only as 
a relief from painful effort, but as a privilege and an honorable distinction. 
Hence slave labor has destroyed the industry of the free race, and the 
prosperity of the State is made dependent upon the forced exertion of 
those who have no interest in it; while those who have are enervated and 
subjected to all the demoralization which must flow from a system which 
makes easy indolence a mark of superiority. The freemen who, in such 
a State, are compelled by poverty to labor, must become yoke-fellows with 
the degraded African race, which makes up the mass of cultivators. Those 
of the free white men who submit to this soon sink to the level of the 
black laborers with whom they associate; while every one whose innate 
energy and intellect teaches him to spurn it, leaves the State, and adds 
to the multitude who fly from it, to exalt the prosperity and grandeur 
which beams on the free States of the Union, making them the miracle 
and glory of this age of progress. 

I point your attention to the fatal tendency of the system which the 
South seeks to impose upon you, to stay its own downward course, with 
feelings of deep chagrin. I am myself a native of the section whose fate 
I deplore, and if my duty to you did not require, I would be the last to 
advert to the malady which preys upon its life. As your representative 
at the seat of political power, I am bound to reveal to you the machina- 
tions of which you are the object, and to open to your view the conse- 
quences which would attend its success. The schemes of those who w^ould 
bind you to the destiny of the slave States, render it necessary that your 
Representative should be excluded from the Halls of Congress; that your 
civil government, and the laws you brought with you, should be denied 
recognition; that you should be left in a condition too helpless to defend 
your own rights, while the plans were maturing for their sacrifice. You 
need not ask, then, w-hy have our own petitions, respectfully presented, been 
rejected? Why our rights, which are certainly indisputable, been so long 
withheld? Why we have been compelled to live under a military domina- 
tion so repugnant to freemen, and so opposed to the acknowledged spirit 
and foundation of this Government? Why our condition, instead of being 
improved by the transfer of allegiance as was promised to. us, has been 
continually getting worse? Why this Government has so long neglected 
giving you that protection against Indian depredations which was so often 
promised, both before and since the treaty of cession? Why the connec- 
tion with this Government, which you have been encouraged to look for- 
w^ard to as the beginning of your prosperity and improvement, has had its 
opening with three years of depredation, miserable, misrule, and military 



despotism. You ar^ left prodraie, ihat Texas may dismember and divide 
J^'ew Mexico, and subject her to Soid/iern influence', thai negro davery may 
be introduced into the remnant of territory that may not be appropriated to 
Texas; and, finally, that the region thus secured to Southern policy may be- 
come the stock on which to graft new conquests from Mexico. To this 
whole poUcy I know you entertain the strongest repugnance. The deep 
stake which you have in the issue of this scheme, demands from you a 
thorough examination and speedy action. It is beyond a question, that 
you cannot expect that assistance and support from this Government 
which you certainly had a right to look for. That you have been deserted 
and transferred to the power of Texas, so far as the administration of the 
War Department — to which 3'ou are committed by the Executive of the 
United States — can effect it, you have the evidence in the conduct of your 
military government. While the Administration say here, that you have 
a Government under which yow can well afford to live, and under which 
you are amply protected, the Secretary at War is giving instructions to 
that Government itself to desert you, when you have most need of an or- 
ganized resistance — thus making it manifest that the Administration here, 
(and especially the Secretary of War, a Southern man,) connives at the 
Texan scheme to dismember your Territory, and the Southern scheme of 
opening it to slavery. The Administration claims to be neutral in this con- 
troversy between the authorities of Texas and the people of New Mexico, 
but when it is understood that the people of New Mexico have no other 
civil government than that which is administered by the military com- 
manders sent there by the War Departm.ent, and those holding commis- 
sions under and during the pleasure of these military commanders, and. 
when we see that they have been instructed not to resist the authorities of 
Texas in their attempt to assume jurisdiction over the people of New 
Mexico, is it not manifest that this ''neutrality''^ is a virtual surrender of 
the actual government of Jfew Mexico into the hands of Texas? Does it not 
demonstrate the connivance of the slaveholding Secretary of War in the 
schemes of Texas and the South? 

It is useless for me to remind you that you have no other than a milita- 
ry Government to administer the civil laws with which you came into the 
Union, (and under which you and your ancestors have lived for two cen- 
turies,) — what other Executive have you, but the commander of the troops 
in New Mexico? Does he not absolutely control all the civil establish- 
ments of your country? Is there a civil officer but holds his ofhce by com- 
mission from the military officer during his will and pleasure? Has he not, 
indeed, assumed to order the courts whom to bring to trial, and in every 
way prescribe their jurisdiction? And when the Secretary of War com- 



mands him not to interfere, or prevent the officers from Texas to exercise 
their commissions in your Territory, can that be called a neutrality? Is it 
not a virtv al abandonment of the government? If you had a separate civil 
government, entirely disconnected with the military commanders of the 
country, thenlheir non-action might be deemed a neutrality. But now, by 
this non-action, they compel you to resist the mihtary government which 
the United States have set up over you, and then organize a government 
and prepare a resistance to the encroachm.ents of Texas. Being thus de- 
serted by this Government to the extent to which this Government can de- 
sert you, (for I have appealed in vain to the Secretary of War and the 
President, to prevent this collision until the question can be adjudicated 
and settled by some competent authority,) it only remains for you to decide 
whether you will tamely submit to this assumption of power. Texas, 
knowing the illegality and injustice of her claim, refuses to submit what is 
a question of law to an impartial Judiciary; and the question of her right, 
has assumed an entirely sectional and geographical phasis. It is sustain- 
ed by the assertion, the sympathy, and assistance of the entire South, 
the motives and object of which are too plain to be disguised; it is avow- 
edly to be a forcible extension of their peculiar institution over a country 
whence it is now excluded, and where it is repugnant alike to the feelings 
and interests of its inhabitants. Under the cover of this Texas claim the 
approaches are made— designed to give a lodgment to slavery in Kew 
Mexico, which shall convert it into a new slave State on its introduction 
into the Union. Out of the dismembered remnant given as a portion to 
Texas, she will be enabled to ek<3 out another, to come in as on« of its four 
new^ slave States counted on, to counterpoise the free institutions of the 
North. If this should not be sufficient, Mexico proper w^ill then be at 
hand to undergo a new partition, or a total submersion in a new Soulhera 
slave confederacy. 

The first step in this process is to supplant the fundamental municipal 
institutions brought by New^ Mexico with her into the Union, by a territo- 
rial government, w^hich, by omitting the inhibition against slavery in the 
Congressional act, failing to reserve that contained in the Mexican code, 
and preventing the people of the Territory from legislating upon the sub- 
ject of slavery, and from re-enacting the prohibitory clause, will unques- 
tionably abolish all protections against that institution; and, indeed, more 
effiictual legislation for the extension of slavery into New Mexico could not 
be enacted. Under it the whole body of Southern influence, inspired by 
political ambition, and looking to preponderance in the aristocratic branch 
of the Federal Government, through an equality of representation with- 
out aa equality of numbers; in part, too, actuated by panic touching th^ 



institution at home — in part by hopes of greater pecuniary gains to be de- 
rived from it, in a country of mines — now that mining is a mania — would 
combine to pour an immense colony of slaves into New Mexico; the conse- 
quence of this would be to level the whole population of New Mexico with 
the new caste brought into competition; and you, my Mexican fellow-citi- 
zens, who till your own soil with your own hands, would be compelled to fly 
your country, or be degraded from your equality of freemen, forfeiting all 
your hopes of rising to the new elevation promised by your alliance with 
the great North American Republic, and living only to witness the ruin of 
all that renders life desirable. 

And what is this pretext of a claim by Texas to New Mexico, under 
which the South seeks to destroy or reduce to nothing your rights as a 
people? The origin of it is, the claim of the United States to the boundary 
of the Del Norte as the western limit of Texas, when as a province it was 
held as part of Louisiana. But, when the United States asserted a claim 
to Texan territory on the Del Norte, it was never pretended even that 
there existed any semblance of title to that portion of the Del Norte which 
was embraced in the boundaries of New Mexico. Before France, from 
whose Government the United States derived its title, asserted its owner- 
ship over the wilderness of Texas, in virtue of the right of discovery — an 
hundred years before a civilized foot-print had been made in the country 
towards fixing a limit on the Del Norte, or elsewhere — New Mexico was 
discovered, conquered, and colonized by the Spaniards; and during all the 
protracted modern negotiations on the part of the United States with Spain, 
in regard to the boundaries of Texas, the boundaries of New Mexico were 
as well established and as universally acknow^ledged as those of Virginia, 
having preceded that State, and all other States of the American Union, in 
becoming an established government, with ascertained limits for its juris- 
diction. In claiming the Del Norte for its territorial boundary, the United 
States looked only to the low^er part of the stream, when it w^as not in- 
cluded within the unquestioned limits of New Mexico, which were recog- 
nised also as being the limits of the wilderness territory, as having pre- 
ceded its exploration, or any claim asserted by France, or any other Power, 
in right of discovery or possession. The Government of the United States, 
In sending General Taylor to the Del Norte to protect the asserted claim 
of Texas before the W' ar, gave him no warrant to invade New Mexico, by 
approaching the Del Norte in that quarter. All the world would have con- 
sidered such an order as an act of war, and General Taylor would as soon 
have thought of marching to the City of Mexico, under the order to pro- 
tect the frontier of Texas on the banks of the Del Norte, as to have marched 
to Santa Fe, on the upper section of that river. Can, then, the recent 



right to territory to the sources of the Del Norte, now set up by Texas in 
deiogation of the prescriptive right of New Mexico, be maintained as de- 
rived fiom conquest or revolution? This would not be a grosser violation 
of the truth of history than to assert its derivation from discovery and colo- 
nization. It is well known, as I have said, that New Mexico was dis- 
covered, conquered, and colonized by the Spaniards one hundred years, at 
least, before a European had set foot upon the soil of Texas. If you trace 
the history of its conquest and settlement by Don Juan Oiieate, in 1595, 
down to its cession by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, it is clearly seen 
that New Mexico has never acknowledged any allegiance, or submitted to 
any power, save that of the Kingdom of Spain and the Republic of Mexico; 
that, in all its demarkations and its extent, in its history, political, social, 
and commercial relations, it was as entirely disconnected with Texas as 
with any other portions of Mexico, and had greatly less intercourse with 
her than with the State of Missouri. 

Even France, in the largest extent of her claim for Louisiana, never 
pretended to embrace within her limits the settlement of New Mexico. 
The earliest discoverers, and the most respected geographers, have acknow- 
ledged the limits and extent of New Mexico. But it is useless to enu- 
merate historians or geographers who have written upon or described our 
territory; its extent and the limits of its jurisdiction are well known, and 
have been defined by the highest authority. The viceroy, Joseph Sar- 
miento, Marquis de la Laguna, whose original draft is now in my possession, 
described the boundary between New Mexico and New Biscay to be at the 
Rio Nombre de Dios or Sacramento, and designated this boundary so as to 
confine each governor of these respective provinces within his own juris- 
diction, and expressly described the village of El Paso to be within the 
jurisdiction of New Mexico. 

Translation of a Spanish document, dated Mexico, March 8, 1697. 

Don Joseph Sarmiento Valladores, knight of the order of Santiago, count of Montezuma, 
Seuor de Monterosano, viceroy, governor, and captain general of New Spain, President of 
the Royal Audience : Whereas, whilst governing this New Spain, the most excellent Sefior 
Conde de Paredes, Marquis de las Lagunas, was pleased to make the following order : 

Don Thomas Antonio Lorenzo Manuel, &c., having named as governor and captain 
general of the province of New Mexico, Captain Don Domingo Vironza Petris de Cruzat, 
and having resolved in general council that it was necessary and convenient for the faculty, 
which to the above named I have conceded of granting lands, it should be notified to the 
governor of Viscaya, in order that he may keep within those of his own jurisdiction, which 
alone concern him; so that reciprocally, one and the other, they may have good corres- 
pondence, keeping themselves each one in the limits of his own jurisdiction, adjusting them 
to the demarkations of their governments, it being understood that that of Viscaya runs to 
the Rio de Nombre de Dios, or called the Saci-amento, and that from thence commences 
the district of the government of New Mexico, with which declaration shall cease all dif- 



8 

ferences. By this present, I order tlio ?aid Don Domingo Vironza Petris tie Cruzat that he 
shall intimate and make known this resolution to Don Bartholeme de Estrada, knight of 
the order of Santiago, governor and captain general of the kingdom of New Viscaya, so 
that if he shall have anything to represent, he may do so to this superior government, 
contenting himself in the mean time. And I order to the above named, that all the Span- 
iards who may have fled from the Paso, and other jurisdictions of the province of New 
Mexico, in the district of their government, that he shall constrain them to return to said 
place— informing me with particularity of having executed the above order, and all other 
duties which present themselves. Mexico, August 20, 1682. El Conde de Paredes, mar- 
quis de la Laguna. By order of his excellency, Don Pedro Velasques de la Cadena. 

Wherefore it is provided by his Majesty, that the Castillian, Don Pedro Rodrigues Ca- 
bero, as military and political governor of the said province of New Mexico, orders to be 
given, and gives by duplicate said orders, that it shall be observed, fulfilled, and executed 
according to its tenor. Mexico, March 8, 1697. 

Signed, JOSEPH SARMIENTO. 

This Rio Sacramento, or called Nombre de Dios, is within what is now, 
and for a long time has been, the acknowledged territory of the State of 
Chihuahua. The Mexican Congress regulated the limits of their jurisdic- 
tion, and by an act of the 27th July, 1824, extended Chihuahua to the 
point of the Paso del Norte. Further than that decree or act curtails New 
Mexico, her limits and jurisdiction have not been encroached upon. 

But it is scarcely necessary to adduce facts or arguments to show that 
Texas and New Mexico were entirely separate and distinct departments — 
as much so as two departments of the Mexican Government could be — pre- 
vious to the Texan revolution; that there was an intervening prairie waste 
of near six hundred miles between the nearest settlements of the two coun- 
tries ; that this was roamed over by the wild Comanche, who alone 
knew whether a practicable road could be made to connect the two set- 
tlements. In that space the Indian held undisputed sway. 

Nor is it necessary to adduce any facts to show that, previous to the 
time of the Texan revolution, New Mexico had always held in undisputed, 
peaceful, and legal jurisdiction all the Mexican settlements north of El 
Paso. The above decree taken from your own archives and the records of 
your Territory prove it conclusively. Even the Texans themselves will 
acknowledge that there was no connection, affinity, or intercourse between 
the countries previous to the commencement of her revolution; and that 
she never, previous to that time, even claimed to embrace within her limits 
any of the settlements of New Mexico. 

Let us look now to her war with Mexico, and see what claim she can 
pretend to New Mexico; why her "magnificent empire carved out by her 
sword" (as Mr. Kaufman calls it) should look to embracing half New Mex- 
ico. If she was an independent republic by conquest and revolution, she 
certainly can embrace within her limits only that which she actually con- 



quered or successfully revolutionized. You did not join her in her war, 
and through all the varied fortunes of that eventful and brave struggle we 
look in vain for any compactor co-operation by the New Mexicans to throw 
off their allegiance to the Mexican Government. Could you be revolution- 
ized without your knowledge or consent, you could scarcely be conquered 
and transferred to the conqueror, and still remain in entire ignorance of the 
fact. You could scarcely become an integral part of a new repubhc, gov- 
erned by the people — one in which the majority controlled— without being 
at least made aware of it, and without any representation in its conven- 
tions, councils, or participation in its government, when you constituted, if 
not a majority, at least half of the entire population within the limits of the 
so called republic. 

Until the one single but unfortunate invasion of your country by Texas, 
it is not asserting too much to say, that you knew nothing whatever of her 
war. You had not participated in it either for or against her. You knew 
nothing of her causes of complaint against the Mex:ican Government. So 
little connection or intercourse w^as there between the two departments, 
that not one-third of your people knew even that she had revolted, and 
was struggling for her independence; and not one-tenth of you had ever 
heard that she claimed to embrace almost your entire country within her 
limits. But she claims that, by treaty, in May, 1836, entered into with 
Santa Anna, the boundary between Texas and Mexico was established on 
the Rio Grande, from its mouth to its source; but it is worse than ridicu- 
lous to call that a treaty, between two governments, which is extorted by 
duress from a commanding general, who is a prisoner of war in the hands 
of the enemy. As w^ell might you contend, that if the famous Texas ex- 
pedition sent to invade New Mexico, in 1841, had capitulated and agreed 
to cede to you one-half of Texas, your claim to the country, so granted, 
would have been as good as that of Texas, based upon the treaty of Santa 
Anna. 

But to show that it was not a treaty, but only a stipulation on the part 
of certain officers to try and procure a treaty from the proper and legiti- 
mate Government of Mexico, and expressly on its face requires confirma- 
tion from higher and better authority, it is only necessary to look to the 
very language of the fourth article of the stipulation and agreement: 

4th. "That the President Santa Anna, in his official character as chief of the Mexican 
nation, and the Generals Don Vicente FUisola, Don Jose Urea, Don Joaquin Ramirez y 
Sesma, and Don Antonio Gaona, as chiefs of armies, do solemnly acknowledge, sanction, 
and ratify the full, entire, and perfect independence of the Republic of Texas, with such 
boundaries as are hereafter set forth and agreed upon for the same. And they do solemn- 
ly and respectively pledge themselves, with all their personal and official attributes, to pro- 

2 



10 

cure, without delay, the final and complete ratification and confirmation ofthia as:reement, 
and all the parts thereof, by the proper and legitimate Government of Mexico, by the in- 
corporation of the same into a solemn and perpetual treaty of amity and commerce, to be 
negotiated with that Government, at the city of Mexico, by ministers plenipotentiary, to 
be deputed by the Government of Texas for this high purpose. 

"5th. That the following be, and the same are hereby, established and made the lines 
of demarcation between the two Republics of Mexico and of Texas, to wit: The line shall 
commence at the estuary or mouth of the Rio Grande, on the western bank thereof, and 
shall pursue the same bank up the said river, to the point where the river assumes the 
name of the Rio Bravo del Norte, from which point it shall proceed on the said western 
bank to the head waters or source of said river," &c. 

And even if Santa Anna, with perfect freedom and without restraint or 
duress, had purported to make an absolute and unconditional transfer of 
territory to Texas, and the parties had not expressly agreed that confirma- 
tion by the proper and legitimate Government of Mexico w^as necessary, 
it could have conveyed nothing. Independent of this agreement and un- 
derstanding by both parties to the solemn compact that there was an exist- 
ing Government of Mexico, whose consent was necessary to a treaty of 
cession, it is well known that the laws of jMexico did not invest any offi- 
cer V. ith supreme control of the affairs of the nation whilst he is in the 
field. So soon as he assumes actual command of the active forces, his 
civil jurisdiction as president and supreme executive of the Government 
must cease; and the very correspondence from Mexico, in which they ac- 
knowledge Santa Anna's defeat by the Texans, is conducted by order of a 
President pro tern.; show^ing that the proper and legitimate Government did 
not recognise Santa Anna as its head or chief. 2\or could Santa Anna and 
the President pro tem. combined have made such a transfer. The sovereign 
Congress of Mexico alone had such power. But this President pro tem., 
instead of consenting to this cession of the territory and agreeing to give 
up to the Rio Grande, expressly instructs Gen. Filisola to retain "Bexar, 
as its preservation is of absolute necessity, in order that the Government, 
according to circumstances, may act as they see fit." And Bexar is cer- 
tainly on the east side of the river, and within the ceded territory. 

Upon this so called treaty or compact then made between Santa Anna 
and President Burnet, Texas, who, in declaring her independence and lay- 
ing the foundation of her revolution, had not as yet gone beyond the old 
limits of the department, now, in December, 1836, seeks to extend her 
limits so as to comport with the compact, and passed the following act to 
define the boundaries of the Republic: 

"An act to define the boundaries of the Republic of Texas. 
"Se it enacted by the Senate and Home of Representatives of the Republic of Texa-i in Congress 
assembled, That, from and after the passage of this act, the civil and political jurisdiction of 



11 

this Rcpu'.ilic be, and is h-reby dec'ared to be, tlie following boundaries, to wit: Beginning 
at the mouth of the S.ibinn nver, and running west along the Gulf of Mexico tJiree leagues 
from land, to the jnouth of the Rio Grande; thence up the principal stream of said river to its 
source: thence," &c. 

Rut could this act of her Congress, based upon a compact or treaty, it- 
self null and void, as being wanting in the important requisites of power 
in the parties to make it a treaty, and being nothing more nor less than a 
pledge of certain officials (as I have shown) to try and procure a treaty, 
could this effect the vested rights of New Mexico, or set aside actual pos- 
session? Let higher authority speak in reference to this; and I quote now 
from the ablest and most zealous of the advocates for Texas. Mr. Wood- 
bury, in his speech in the Senate of the United States, says: 

" Most people considered the line to run north on that river (the Rio Grande) only to 
the mountains, though tlie legislature of Texas, by a law, have clanned to run to its source. 
But Texas, by a mere law, could acquire no title beyond what she conquered from Mexi- 
co and actually governed. Hence, though her law includes more than ancient Texas, she 
could hold and convey only that; or, at the uttermost, only what she exercised clear ju- 
risdiction over. As to that there is and can be no eventual contest ; and the deed of ces- 
sion, like one by an individual at common law, v/ould practically pass no more than was 
owned, and under it the grantee would get no more if he could, and could not if he would." 

And in a note to same speech, he says : 

"The law of Texas, including in her claim more than she actually occupied, donabtless 
originated very innocently in the compact by Santa Anna with President Burnet in 1836, 
agreeing solemnly that Texas should extend not only to the mouth of the Rio del Norte, 
but thence to its source. " 

And if she had ever conquered from Mexico a foot of the soil of New 
Mexico, or actually governed it, it is certainly not known in tlie history of 
the two countries, and Texas, we know, has generally recorded all her 
successes. Nothing, then, was done by Texas to make this her boundary, 
so far as New IMexico was concerned, except to declare it to be the boun- 
dary; and, therefore, up to the time of her annexation to the United States, 
or until the treaty proposing annexation was entered into and submitted to 
the Senate, her right rests entirely upon this act or claim by her Congress; 
and this right is weakened, if it could be made weaker than a bare claim 
without right is, from the fact that, in the oni}^ attempt she made to extend 
her authority into New Mexico, she found an authority in possession, and 
her expedition met with a disastrous defeat. And there has never been a 
time when Texas would not have found an authority in possession of New 
Mexico adverse to her control. If the single act of claiming on her part 
could establish any right to waste, unappropriated, or unoccupied lands, it 
certainly is different where, as in the case of New Mexico, there has beea 



12 

from the very discovery of the country an undisputed, quiet, and unbroken 
adverse possession. 

When the annexation of Texas to the United States was proposed by the 
treaty In 1844, it said, "the Republic of Texas cedes to the United States 
all Its territories;" and how may I ask, was it then construed; what ex- 
tent was it then Intended to embrace, let Its most eloquent, able, and in- 
defatigable advocates speak. They contended that Texas could only em- 
brace what she had revolutionized, conquered, and reduced to her subjec- 
tion. 

Mr. Walker, In his speech on Annexation, May, 1844, says: 

*'Now there is no description of boundary in the treaty. The words are, the Republic 
of Texas cedes to the United States all its territories. If these territories extend to the 
Del Norte they are ceded, not otherwise. It is said that Texas, by the act of her Congress 
of 1836, claims to the Del Norte, and that, therefore, the cession by name necessarily ex- 
tends to that boundary. But the boundaries of a nation depend upon something more 
than its own claims; these may extend beyond its rightful limits, and when it is ceded by 
name, that cession extends only to the country embraced within its lawful boundaries." 

Mr. Breese, In speaking of the objections urged to the limits and boun- 
dary, says: 

"I consider all these objections as futile. If Texas has no claim to the left bank of the 
rio del Norte, we get no right by the cession. The cession for all she does possess is good. 
If I convey five hundred acres of land, and have title to but one hundred of it, is not my 
conveyance valid for the one hundred? What shall be the true boundaries of Texas is left 
by the treaty as an open question, as all such matters usually are. When we acquired Lou- 
isiana in 1803, the boundaries were not defined, and it was not until 1819, they were es- 
tablished west to the Sabine. The limits of Texas are to be adjusted hereafter." 

Mr. Owen, of Indiana: 

"This matter of boundary, about which much has been said, is a very simple one; even 
supposing the treaty of annexation ratified in its present form. By that treaty, (article 1,) 
Texas cedes to the United States all its territories, no boundaries whatever being speci- 
fied. Whatever territory Texas is lawfully entitled to, the United States would, therefore, 
by the ratification of that treaty, acquire; no more and no less. 

Mr. Sevier, in the Senate, January 4, 1848, says: 

"I am one of those who have ever contended, and do now contend, that the territory 
lying between the Nueces and Rio Grand, and below New Mexico, rightfully and properly 
belongs to Texas by title of conquest and possession. I never did contend that the country 
east of the Rio Grande, and included in New Mexico, did belong to Texas, for she neither 
conquered nor held possession of it." 

Mr. Ashley, In his remarks In the Senate in 1845 upon the annexation 
of Texas, speaking of its extent, said : 

"And here I will add, that the present boundaries of Texas, 1 learn from Judge Ellis, 
fhe President of the convention that formed the constitution of Texas, and also a member 



13 

of the first legislature uml.; that constitution, were fixed as they now are, solely and pro- 
fessedly with a view of lenving a large margin in the negotiation with Mexico, and not 
with the expectation of retaining them as they now exist in their statute book.'' 

Mr. Inge, of Alabama, in 1848, said: 

"The only claim of Texas to any part of her territory rests upon successful revolution, and 
as far as her revolution extended , pari jjossit her territory extended." 

Mr. Buchanan, in his speech on the Annexation, says : 
*' They left the boundary of Texas without specification in the treaty, and have prompt- 
ly offered to adjust it with Mexico on fair and honorable terms. Texas has always 
claimed to the Del Norte, and is now in possession of the whole of the left bank of that 
river to the Paso, nearly a thousand miles from its mouth. Her claim to that portion of 
New Mexico which lies east of this river and north of the Paso, is certainly of a very 
doubtful character ; and it is one upon which we ought not to insist." 

In his correspondence with Mr. Slidell, after contending that Texas ex- 
tended to the Rio Grande as far up as El Paso, and had thus far been re- 
presented in her government and reduced to her subjection and control, 
he says : 

" The case is different in regard to New Mexico. Santa Fe, its capital, was settled by 
the Spaniards more than two centuries ago ; and that province has been ever since in their 
possession and that of the Republic of Mexico. The Texans never have conquered or 
taken possession of it, nor have its people ever been represented in any of their legislative 
assemblies or conventions." 

If, then, these distinguished statesmen regarded "Texas with all her ter- 
ritories" as leaving the boundary an open question, and as conveying only 
what she could rightfully claim and had reduced to her subjection, and 
that such a conveyance "would convey no more if she could, and could not 
if she would," with how much greater force will this restrictive construction 
apply to annexation as changed to the expression used in the resolutions 
which afterwards consummated the act. The objection which was urged 
so successfully to " Texas with all her territories," and which was con- 
ceived to be obviated by changing the phraseology to "the territory pro- 
perly included in, and rightfully belonging to, the Republic of Texas," 
certainly meant something. And it could mean nothing else than that 
our Government did not recognise, as belonging to her, all which she 
claimed; but intended, by express words, to restrict her conveyance to 
what she actually held, and had a right to hold and to convey. 

And had not every department of our Government recognised Santa Fe 
as being in Mexico; had we not consuls and commercial agents there; and 
in 1841 and 1842, had not the President, in his correspondence to secure 
the release of the ardent young Americans taken prisoners in the Santa 
Fe expedition, acknowledged it to be in Mexico and within her jurisdic- 



14 

tion? The House of Representatives, on the 14th of January, 1842, call- 
ed upon the President, by reyolution, to lay before them the information in 
his possession, <<touching the American citizens captured near Sania Fe, 
in Mexico. "^^ And in conducting that correspondence he had recognised 
it to be a part of the Republic of Mexico. 

This all occurred before annexation was consummated. Let us see what 
our Government has done since that, by solemn acts of its different depart- 
ments, to fix and recognise the jurisdiction and Government of Aew 
Mexico. 

After the annexation of Texas, you very well know that a consul and 
vice consul were appointed and maintained by our Government at Santa Fe, 
until the breaking out of the war and the invasion of that country by Gen. 
Kearny ; that the citizens of the United States were required to pay 
duties and tribute to the Mexican government; that that government alone 
controlled the custom-houses, the revenue, and entire management of the 
country until the arrival of Gen. Kearny at the very entrance of your 
capital; that the President of the United States expressly said that Santa 
Fe was the capital of New Mexico, and New Mexico a Mexican province, 
which Texas had never conquered or reduced to possession, or brought under 
her laws; and if the United States forces were ordered to invade it and 
seize it as part or portion of Texas, this fact was most scrupulously con- 
cealed from you; no proposition was then made to divide or dismember the 
territory, but every promise of protection and inducements to reconcilia- 
tion were offered you, and you were promised that your whole territory 
should be embraced within a liberal territorial government. 

But a solemn act of Congress, which required of course the confirma- 
tion of other departments of the Government, had fixed and decided your 
locality and your nationality. After the annexation of Texas, and when 
she constituted a State of the American Union, so far as the act of our 
Government was concerned, an act was passed 3d March, 1845, entitled 
^^An.act allowing drawback upon foreign merchandise exported in the origin- 
al packages to Chihuahua and Santa Fe, in Mexico, and to the British North 
American provinces adjoining the United States." And the act required 
that, upon the arrival of such goods at Santa Fe or Chihuahua, they should 
be submitted to the inspection of the consul of the United States. And 
could any act in more express and positive terms declare you then to be- 
long to Mexico? You were as positively fixed to be Mexican, as that the 
British North American provinces belonged to Great Britain. Could any 
thing be more expressive and conclusive than this fact, that after annexing 
all which properly was included in and rightfully belonged to Texas, our 
Government by as solemn an act as this should proceed immediately to 



15 

fix and declare you, who had been claimed by Texas, to be still Mexican 
citizens and subjects, and that you did not rightfully belong to Texas, but 
were, as they continued afterw^ards to recognise you, a constituent part of 
the Mexican Republic. And again, Mr. Secretary Walker, w^ho as 
Senator Walker had declared, in discussing the treaty of annexation, that 
<' the boundaries of a nation depend upon something more than its own 
claims;" in his annual Treasury report to Congress afterwards, in Decem- 
ber, 1845, says ^'The act of 3d March last, allowing a drawback on foreign 
imports exported from certain of our ports to Canada, and also to Santa 
Fe and Chihuahua, in Mexico, has gone to some extent into effect under 
regulations prescribed by this Department, and is beginning to produce the 
most happy results." This declaration by him who had taken so promi- 
nent part in the annexation of Texas, now after its entire consummation, 
speaking of Santa Fe, adds his evidence to its being a Mexican town with- 
in the Republic of Mexico, and w^ithout any reference or intimation to the 
claim which Texas had set up to it. 

Thus spoke and acted the Treasury Department after the annexation of 
Texas; let us examine what the Executive said; notwithstanding President 
Polk commanded his forces to invade and take possession of New Mexico 
as a province of the Mexican Republic, and afterwards declared that it had 
been occupied and taken possession of as such, and that ^' Texas had never 
conquered or reduced to actual possession, and brought under her laws, that 
part of New Mexico lying on the east bank of the Rio Grande;" still he 
says that nothing which he had done could "injuriously affect the right 
which the President believes to be justly asserted by Texas to the whole 
territory on this side of the Rio Grande, whenever the Mexican claim to it 
shall have been extinguished by treaty. '^'^ This is most strange language in 
the face of the Annexation resolutions; if it was properly included within 
and rightfully belonged to Texas, it had already been annexed, and there 
was no Mexican claim to it which it could te necessary to extinguish by 
treaty. If it was ours by annexation, and then we had the pedis possessio, the 
actual occupancy by our troops; ours by rightful title and actual possession, 
what had Mexico left to her which she could part w^ith by treaty? But 
this declaration is not perhaps more strange than that of the President, 
when he says that " Texas had asserted a right to that part of New Mexico 
east of the Rio Grande, ***** which is believed 
to be well founded; but this right had never been reduced to her actual 
possession and occupancy." As a revolted province it could only claim 
what it had conquered and occupied; still he admits it to be a Just claims 
though wanting in the essential requisites to found a title — conquest and 
occupancy. 



16 

But let us again quote Mr. Buchanan, as Secretary of State, untler Mr, 
Polk; whom we heretofore quoted as saying in the Senate that the claim 
of Texas, north of El Paso, was "one upon which we should not in- 
sist." In his instructions to Mr. Slldell, after saying that there was '^no 
serious doubt" about her title to El Paso, and instructing him to buy all of 
New Mexico, for which he might assume the payment of all just claims 
of our citizens against Mexico, and in addition pay five millions of dollars, 
he continues "should the Mexican authorities prove unwilling to extend 
our boundary beyond the Del Norte, you are in that case instructed to 
oiFer to assume the payment of all just claims of citizens of the United 
States against Mexico, should she agree that the line shall be established 
along the boundary defined by the act of Congress of Texas, approved 
December 19, 1836, to wit, beginning at the mouth of the Rio Grande, 
thence up the principal stream of said river to its source, thence due north 
to the forty-second degree of north latitude." And in his same cor- 
respondence with Mr. Slidell, he computes the claims of American citizens 
at more than five millions of dollars, thus offering this sum for a country 
which he admits w^as not ours, w^e ought not to claim, and which had not 
been embraced within the limits of ancient Louisiana. And can any man 
of sense say that this distinguished diplomatist and statesman would have 
gone thus far, if we had already a title which we ought to rely on, if it was 
already properly included within, and rightfully belonged to, one ^f the 
States of our Union? 

Now let us examine the articles of Annexation and the conduct of Texas 
herself; when she adopted her constitution under which she was admitted 
into the Union, she included in it a provision that ^'all laws or parts of 
laws now in force in the Republic of Texas, which are not repugnant to 
the Constitution of the United States, or the joint resolution for annexing 
Texas to the United States, should be continued in force;" and I contend 
that the act of the Republic of Texas defining her boundary, by which she 
conflicted with Mexico, is repugnant to the very first of the con- 
ditions contained in the Annexation resolutions, viz: *'that said State to 
be formed subject to the adjustment by this Government of all questions 
of boundary that may arise with other Governments." The act which 
fixed the boundary absolutely and unconditionally was certainly inconsis- 
tent with, and repugnant to, that which left it in the power of the United 
States to adjust and settle; and that it was so construed is evident from 
the fact that our Government never regarded it, but proceeded at once to 
try and settle and adjust it with Mexico, continuing to recognise the au- 
thority of the Mexican Government in New Mexico, and requiring its 
citizens to conform to her laws. But Texas herself must have so regarded 



IT 

it, or else being a popular representative republican government she 
would certainly have extended an invitation to the citizens of the country- 
adjacent to Santa Fe, to participate with her in framing her constitution 
and fundamental law, under which they were all to come so brotherly into 
the Union, and form fellow-citizens of one State; if she properly extended 
thsre, she had at least fifty thousand citizens whom she was disfranchising, 
and this disfranchisement at least we did not expect until she had been 
fixed in her control by other and higher power. 

Why, you will ask, then, does a pretence to control you, so baseless in 
itself and so insolently put forward, receive any encouragement or support 
from a Government which you have been taught to believe denies nothing 
to the weak? Why has Texag been permitted to retard your advance; to 
delay that encouragement and protection you have been induced to believe 
this government extends to all its citizens, and has so often promised to 
you? Why has a military government been retained over you by the 
President and Secretary of War, which they secretly instruct to surrender 
upon the first show of Southern authority? It is by thus leaving you 
deserted and defenceless, a hope is entertained that you can be driven to 
receive a government and control which you abhor, and with it an insti- 
tution which the whole power of the Government is exerted to extend. 

But it becomes you to look well to all the consequences and results of a 
decision that you are properly within Texas. You have every reason to 
believe that she entertains no kindly feelings towards you. That disposi- 
tion to a relentless persecution and proscription of all Mexicans with- 
in her claimed limits, who would not participate with her in her revolution, 
is only lulled until she can, by the aid and assistance of the Government, 
firmly establish her authority over you. As a republic, did she not pass 
acts disfranchising all within her territory who did not take part with her, 
or left the country to avoid the struggle; and also confiscating their pro- 
perty? Are not those acts retained in force by her present constitution^ 
continuing all the acts of her republic not in derogation of the Constitution 
of the United States and the act of annexation? When she attempted to 
extend her jurisdiction over you, and sent a judge from Texas, did he bring 
with him the power to extend any of the benefits of Texan citizenship? 
Was not the so-called county of Santa Fe especially exempted from the 
benefits of her land system, by which, if you were citizens, you were 
entitled to full benefits of head rights, entries, and surveys, and by w^hich 
you could have saved to yourselves your own homesteads and farms? Look 
even to what they are doing here, when the proposition is before Congress 
to buy the absurd and groundless title of Texas to your territory; that rep- 
3 



18 

resentative who represents you, as it is asserted here in Congress, pro- 
poses as an amendment that if the 34th parallel of latitude is made the 
northern limit of Texas, and consequently the southern limit of New- 
Mexico, Congress, as a condition of the purchase, shall stipulate to drive the 
Comanches north of that parallel, that the whole strength of this tribe 
shall yet be crowded upon you. 

You are already surrounded by, and accessible to, forty thousand hostile 
Indians; at least fifteen thousand warriors. You are less protected, and 
property and life are less secure now, than when New Mexico was a part 
of the Mexican territory, even under the most distressed and helpless 
condition of that unfortunate revolutionary government. In no part of 
your territory, except immediately within the largest and most populous 
towns, are the people and their property safe. In the very sight of your 
capitol, large flocks ^of sheep and cattle have been repeatedly driven off, 
and the inhabitants, women and children, killed or carried into captivity 
from which death itself would be a desirable relief. All attempts to ex- 
tend the settlements upon the most valuable part of the country, or to 
explore and develope its resources have been rendered futile and vain, and 
your population has been contracted by the entire destruction of the most 
exposed frontier settlements. No road is safe by which you have access 
to, or egress from your territory, and all intercourse is being cut off with 
the civilized world. 

The wealth of your territor}' is being diminished. The immense herds 
of sheep and flocks of cattle which have supplied so largely the Mexican 
country with meat, are now no longer carried to a foreign market; and 
your territory, which could supply all jMexico, now scarcely raises enough 
for home consumption. The amount and value of property lost and taken 
from the country b}^ Indian depredations during the three years subsequent 
to its occupation by the troops of the United States, largely exceeds the 
amount taken the three years previous to their occupation of the 
country. This, no one conversant with the history of your country 
can deny, and it is a frightful commentary upon the promises of pro- 
tection which have so often been made to you. This Government is 
responsible, too, for that condition of Indian hostilities in your country: 
for many years previous to the occupation of the territory, many of 
the most warlike tribes had been at peace with the inhabitants of New 
Mexico, and there was scarcely ever a time w^hen they were all in open 
hostility. But the various commanders of that department having as- 
sumed to regulate these Indians, compel them to acknowledge submis- 
sion to our Government, regulate their relations of peace and war with 
the different tribes, confine them to distinct and marked portions of the 



19 

country, demand of them a surrender of Mexican captives, and establish 
an entire mastery over them who had never acknowledged or submit- 
ted to any control from the Spanish or Mexican Governments, and 
all this, with a force totally inadequate to its execution, was, of course, 
but to raise up a war which would bring into action the full strength of 
every tribe. Take, for example, a soUtary instance: the band of North- 
ern Apaches which do not number more than one hundred and seventy- 
five warriors, and infest but a part of the north and northeast portion of 
your territory; yet it may be confidently asserted, that this single band, since 
your territory was in possession of the United States forces, have murdered 
at least as many Americans as they have warriors in their entire nation, 
besides the number of Mexicans they have killed or carried into captiv- 
ity; and their entire subsistence during this time has been by plundering 
our frontier exposed settlements. The Southern Apaches, much more 
numerous, and as ferocious and warUke, have in the same manner infested 
the southern extremity of your country. The entire western border is 
equally exposed to the Navajoes, who have, with perfect impunity, carried 
their depredations to the heart of the country, and in sight of the flag staff 
of your capitol. The eastern part is not better protected. This is truly 
a lamentable picture, and calls loudly, but in vain, for the sympathy and 
assistance of our Government. The fact that the Indians all live entirely 
upon horseback; have no settled permanent homes, that all their wealth 
and property consists of bands of horses herds and flocks;; that their pre- 
datory habits require constant moving; that they have almost an unlimited 
extent of vast prairies through which they can retreat, is sufficient to show 
that cavalry or mounted troops alone can successfully follow and chastise 
them. All experience in that country teaches that infantry is of no use 
in the pursuit of such a foe. The most experienced miltiary men have esti- 
mated that it will require at least fifteen hundred well mounted men to con- 
quer and reduce to subjection these Indians. Attacking us as they do, by 
rapid advances and retreats, each warrior provided with a number of horses 
and relays, it is impossible to be prepared for them at every point where 
they make an incursion, or to collect a force and overtake them betore 
they are again secure in their mountain retreats and fastnesses. It cannot 
be said that this state of things is unknown here; I have added ray indi- 
vidual testimony to what your convention has said, by repeated represen- 
tations to the War Department and the President of the United States. 
All the military officers have reported the country in a deplorable condition; 
it is all corroborated by every traveller or trader who is fortunate enough to 
get safely out of the country. The strength, localities, and habits of those 
Indians have been communicated to Congress, and even the Mexican 



20 

minister has found it necessary to call the attention of our Government 
to the execution of that article of the treaty by which we have promised 
to protect the Mexican settlements from Indians incorporated in our limits. 
Your Indian agent continues to add his accounts of the unfortunate condi- 
tion of the country, and beg for increased protection. These depredations 
have gone to such an extent without any retribution being dealt upon the 
warlike and savage plunderers, that it encourages all tribes (and even those 
at a greater distance from you, who have long been disposed to peace) to 
undertake the same hostilities and participate in what they deem objects of 
general spoliation. And yet, in view of all these facts, which the corres- 
pondence accompanying the President's message shows him to be in pos- 
session of, the President says in that message, that the people of New 
Mexico are amply protected! Instead of offering you the protection you 
have a right to expect from the perils which surround and threaten to 
overwhelm you, the Secretary of War, as I have shown, connives at the 
introduction of another element of danger in your midst, by lending him- 
self to the Southern scheme to introduce negroes into your territory. 

Under the present aspect at Washington, I feel it my duty to say to 
you, that little expectaion can be entertained of an impartial considera- 
tion or a just disposition of your cause. Your opponents are all in power 
or seeking power. Those who have your fate in their hands have either 
great interest at stake dependent on your ruin, or high and ambitious hopes 
that look to consummation through your sacrifice. The great body of the 
people of the United States love justice, and all their sympathies are with 
you. My advice, then, is, to appeal to them to avert the mischiefs plotted 
by intriguing politicians and sordid speculators, and for the present 
RELY UPON yourselves; assert your rights by the establishment of a 
State government interdicting slavery; gird yourselves up to resist its in- 
introduction into your territory as a whole, or into any part by means of 
dismemberment; and the time \Till come, when the masses of the Union 
will rally around your cause, and enable you to defy and defeat all the 
machinations of your enemies. 

HUGH N. SMITH. 

Washington, April 14, 1850, 



( «4@ 














'.•' .A 



** ..•■•♦ "^^ 



<v ',..» .(.-, 









•?■. ,■«' 



-.s^' 









>.^ ".^^'' y-o "'"i^R" „o^°X "•'^ 



<-\ V o P 3 . 



0. \5'- 






c.^ 



-^^ 










;>- '*'-^ 



'V, 



^^0^ 



/^ 













v-s^ 












.,, V^\^^ "o^^^^/ V^^V V 






<^^^ 




























^^*^'>^%\ .^°.-a&><>- ^'1^^'% ^° ■ 





V\tRT 
BOOKB(NCMNC 

Crantville Pa 

Jan Feb 198? 




oV 



'^0^ 







